The Musicians’ Union has launched a new guide to busking in Liverpool, aimed at promoting harmony between street performers and local business owners. Harmony as in an absence of conflict, obviously. Local business owners aren’t expected to join in.

‘The Guide To Busking In Liverpool’ comes two years after the MU successfully opposed the introduction of licensed pitches for busking in the city. It has been published jointly with Liverpool City Council, the Keep Streets Live Campaign and the Business Improvement District.

Says the MU’s Regional Officer for the North of England, Morris Stemp: “The aim of the guide is to foster a vibrant street culture which allows for spontaneity whilst at the same time making provision for constructively resolving any issues that may arise using existing statutory powers, and is an example I anticipate many will want to follow. It also blows apart the myth that busking is in some way illegal”.

He added: “This is in stark contrast to some less pragmatic authorities and councils, where heavy handed regulation and over-zealous bureaucracy stifle self-expression. Buskers in Liverpool now have a guide that will help nurture music and other art forms on the streets, with all the benefits this will bring to the city, to buskers and to wider society”.

In part, that was a little swipe at Camden Council, which has imposed restrictions on busking in the London borough. Attempts to oppose this move were unsuccessful, with the council’s decision upheld by the High Court earlier this year.

]]>http://www.completemusicupdate.com/article/musicians-union-publishes-buskers-guide-to-liverpool/feed/0As it issues its 50 millionth takedown request, BPI calls on Google to do more about piracyhttp://www.completemusicupdate.com/article/as-it-issues-its-50-millionth-takedown-request-bpi-calls-on-google-to-do-more-about-piracy/
http://www.completemusicupdate.com/article/as-it-issues-its-50-millionth-takedown-request-bpi-calls-on-google-to-do-more-about-piracy/#commentsMon, 18 Nov 2013 10:41:55 +0000http://www.completemusicupdate.com/?p=96713

[Click for full details]]]>

Following the news last week that Google had so far received 200 million takedown requests this year from the intellectual property sectors, with the record industry the most prolific requester, the UK’s record label trade body the BPI has confirmed it has now sent over 50 million takedown notices to the search engine, since it started routinely requesting the removal of links to copyright infringing content from the web giant’s search results.

The BPI, which started issuing takedown requests to Google just two and half years ago, is apparently the first rights organisation to pass the 50 million takedowns landmark.

Numerous rights owners across the music industry are now routinely issuing takedown requests to Google and a plethora of other sites that inadvertently link to or host unlicensed content as a result of automated or user activity. The process is based on a bit of US copyright law which obliges web firms to respond to the takedown requests, and which is increasingly utilised globally.

Technology is used to speed up the takedown issuing process, and the BPI’s Anti-Piracy Unit operates its own system overseen by the body’s piracy chief David Wood. The trade body says that its current anti-piracy platform is actually capable of issuing more takedown notices to Google than it currently does, but the web giant sets a daily limit on how many takedowns any one organisation can submit.

Which is just one of the ways in which Google is hindering the efforts of the legit content industries, say the BPI. As previously reported, key players across the music industry have been calling on the web firm for sometime to introduce more measures to ensure legit sources of copyright content appear way above illegal sources in its search results.

Although Google has occasionally made gestures in this direction, in the main it has resisted efforts to force it to become more proactive in policing piracy, and those measures it has taken – the rights owners say – have had limited impact.

BPI boss Geoff Taylor told CMU on Friday: “Google leads consumers into a murky underworld of unlicensed sites, where they may break the law or download malware or inappropriate content, because it persistently ranks such sites above trusted legal services when consumers search for music to download”.

He went on: “Google knows full well, from millions of notices and from court decisions, which sites are illegal. Yet it turns a blind eye to that information and chooses to keep on driving traffic and revenues to the online black market, ahead of legal retailers. It’s time for Google to be held to the same standards of behaviour as everyone else. It has enormous power as a gatekeeper to the internet. If it won’t choose to behave ethically and responsibly, it’s time for governments and regulators to take action”.

While it generally leads on the takedown frenzy for the UK music industry, the BPI is keen to stress that it’s not just the record labels that want Google to act in this domain, and to that end reps from the Featured Artists Coalition and Musicians’ Union both backed Taylor on this issue on Friday.

FAC’s Crispin Hunt told CMU: “A brilliant new band that I recently worked with has just been dropped by their label because their debut EP sold barely 4000 copies. Yet the number one site on a Google search for the same EP boasts of 23,000 illegal downloads, then directs me to an online brothel, next to an advert for Nissan, as I rip the tunes. What more do I need to say?”

MU’s John Smith added: “The creative industries lose around 20% of their revenue every year because of piracy and illegal downloading, and this has a knock-on effect on the future work opportunities available to MU members. Powerful organisations such as Google need to be fair to the individual creators and performers whose rights are being undermined by these illegal websites”.

The Musicians’ Union has hit out at plans by Camden Council to regulate busking in the London borough. New regulations passed by the local authority on Monday mean that musicians will now need to pay for licences to busk in the district, with the risk of fines and having their instruments confiscated if they play a note without a permission letter from the council in hand.

Criticising the scheme, which the MU says may prevent musicians from playing in the borough, the Union’s National Organiser for Live Performance Dave Webster told CMU: “It is a real shame that just a year after the Live Music Act was brought in to encourage the performance of live music that Camden Council has decided to bring in these draconian measures against busking”.

He went on: “Live music is an integral part of London’s identity and the onerous and potentially expensive requirements that Camden is placing on buskers will threaten the borough’s vibrant atmosphere. The references to ‘noise’ and ‘nuisance’ in Camden’s policy are particularly unhelpful and do not reflect the positive cultural contribution made by buskers to London life”.

He concluded: “The borough has given in to complaints made by a small group of residents who live on and around Camden High Street, which is inevitably a loud place to live irrespective of busking. We urge Camden Council to reconsider this policy and the MU would be happy to work with them to establish a code of best practice for busking, as we did in places like Liverpool”.

For it’s part, the Council insists that the new licensing process is “light touch regulation” designed mainly to deal with complaints about amplified and louder percussion-based busking. A basic twelve month licence will cost £19, though certain kinds of performance will require a £47 advanced licence which might have other limitations attached. Once licensed buskers will usually be able to play anywhere that its safe to play in the borough between 10am and 9pm.

Responding to the scheme’s critics, the Council’s Community Safety Councillor Abdul Hai told CMU: “Campaigners against this new policy have been making a mountain out of a molehill suggesting that we are trying to outlaw busking. I can categorically say this is not what this policy seeks to achieve. We’re simply implementing light touch regulation of street entertainment that will strike a balance between the rights of residents to a quiet life and buskers wishing to perform in public places”.

He added: “This light touch regulation will restrict the use of amplified equipment, particularly close to residential areas late into the evening. We believe that all forms of street entertainment are an important part of the musical and cultural heritage of the borough and that is why licences will not be charged at a prohibitive rate, instead costing just £19″.

01: Warner Music and Clear Channel announced an alliance. Under the deal, Warner will start to receive royalties for its music being used on the US radio giant’s terrestrial radio stations (something that doesn’t currently happen Stateside). In return the mini-major will offer the media firm much more friendly terms for its iHeartRadio streaming platform. Warner artists will also benefit from a range of promotional ventures across Clear Channel’s networks. The new alliance mirrors deals done between Clear Channel and about ten indies, but is significant because of the size of Warner’s catalogue. CMU report | New York Times report

02: Vivendi confirmed a split plan was under consideration. It’s been mooted for some time that the Universal Music owner would spin-off its flagging French telecoms business to focus on its content assets – Universal and the Canal+ TV company. And this week the conglom’s board confirmed it was now formally considering a plan for such a move. Meanwhile one of the company’s key shareholders, Vincent Bolloré, was appointed as Vice-Chairman. It’s rumoured he has his eyes on the also-available CEO role though, even if that doesn’t happen, it seems certain Bolloré will now play a significant role in shaping Vivendi’s immediate future. CMU report | Financial Times report

03: Victor Willis said he had reclaimed his Village People copyrights. Willis first went legal over the copyrights in most of the Village People’s hits, on which he was a co-writer, in 2011. It now emerges that Willis has utilised the so called ‘termination right’ introduced into US copyright law in 1978 but only just coming into effect, that allows songwriters who assign their rights to a publisher to reclaim them after 35 years. Arguments by the company which controls the copyrights that Willis contributed to the songs on a ‘work for hire’ basis back in the 1970s have seemingly been rejected in the courts, though all this is subject to an appeal. But if Willis does win back his slice of the hits, he’ll be the first high profile songwriter to have exploited the termination right. CMU report | Billboard report

04: The MU got TUC support for a private copy levy. The Musicians Union is arguing that when the government introduces a private copy right into UK law, so that consumers can legally make private back up copies of recordings (eg by ripping tracks from CD to PC), there should be some sort of levy to compensate artists and songwriters, most likely applied to MP3 players and similar devices. Such a levy system exists elsewhere in Europe where the private copy right has existing for a long time. But current proposals to introduce the right over here do not include provisions for the levy. The Trade Union Congress backed the MU’s call for the levy at their conference this week. CMU report

05: Kim Dotcom confirmed the name of his direct-to-fan platform. The often controversial MegaUpload founder recently stepped back from his cloud-storage business Mega to concentrate on his legal challenges and other projects. The ‘other projects’ include the long discussed direct-to-fan platform originally called Megabox. But last weekend Dotcom confirmed the new venture will actually be called Baboom when it launches. Artists will be encouraged to set up profiles, give away content, and earn a cut of ad money. Dotcom also shared some screen grabs of the in-development new service with Torrentfreak. CMU report | Torrentfreak report

The Trade Union Congress, meeting in Bournemouth this week, has passed a motion put forward by the Musicians’ Union calling on the government to include a levy as part of plans to introduce a private copy-right into UK law. They probably won’t.

As much previously reported, the government is currently pressing ahead with an expansion of the so called fair dealing system in UK copyright law, based on recommendations in the 2011 Hargreaves Review of IP law. This will increase the number of scenarios where people can use or make copies of copyright material without the permission of the copyright owner.

Amongst them is the introduction of the so called private-copy or format-shifting right for sound recordings. At the moment in the UK, if a consumer rips a track from a CD they bought to a PC, they are infringing copyright. Under most other copyright systems that ripping would be allowed, providing the copy is for the private use of the person who legitimately bought the CD in the first place.

Nearly everyone agrees that this is bad law, because it turns millions of music fans into copyright infringers, and even the record industry backs the introduction of a private copy exemption. However, elsewhere in Europe a system exists where the music industry is compensated for private copies being made by a levy being charged on those products onto which copies are transferred – traditionally blank cassettes and CDRs, increasingly MP3 players – which is passed back to the music community.

However, Hargreaves proposed a private copy right without any levy to benefit the music community, and that is currently the government’s plan. The music industry is planning on opposing that element of the private copy right, arguing that rights owners deserve compensation for the new right consumers will enjoy, or at the very least parity with the rest of the European music community. And it’s that viewpoint that the MU promoted at the TUC Conference yesterday, getting support for the levy from the union movement.

MU General Secretary John Smith told CMU: “The MU is not proposing an ‘iPod tax’ on consumers. What we are asking for is fair compensation for creators from the device manufacturers. These manufacturers are already paying patent and software licences for each device sold, and yet, under the UK proposal, the act of copying music onto these devices – the content the consumer is most interested in – will not generate any income for musicians”.

He added: “Despite an outstanding international reputation for British musicians, more than half of MU members still earn less than £20,000 a year from their profession. We have one of the best music industries in the world. The government should be making it easier to survive as a musician – not harder. I am delighted that the TUC have agreed to support us in this battle”.

Where the private copy levy already exists is has proven controversial in recent years, particularly as standalone music devices start to disappear and the question arises as to whether or not it is right to apply a levy to a smartphone, even though many users won’t copy music on to their device, or will only copy music downloaded from a digital music store with a licence that already allows the format shift.

And while some see digital locker providers as the next obvious target for the levy, as those firms are already doing deals with rights owners (to allow scan-and-match type functionality), arguably a statutory levy isn’t required.

The Musicians’ Union is today celebrating the 120th anniversary of its foundation with a conference and birthday bash in Manchester, where it was formed by Joe Williams back in 1893. Amongst those speaking at the two day event are TUC General Secretary Frances O Grady, UK Music CEO Jo Dipple and Shadow Arts Minister Dan Jarvis.

The organisation’s General Secretary John Smith told CMU: “The challenges that have faced musicians since Joe Williams’ inaugural meeting in Manchester have been many. The arrival of ‘talkies’ at the turn of the century, two World Wars, the use of gramophone recordings on radio, developing technology and online piracy all threatened the livelihoods of musicians. Through every twist and turn, the MU has stood strong, fighting the fight for those who make a living from music. Long may that continue”.

Elsewhere in MU news, and speaking of challenges, Smith has spoken about the royalties paid to artists by streaming services. This, of course, follows Nigel Godrich and Thom Yorke’s much discussed decision to pull music by their side projects off many streaming services, in protest at the royalties new artists are paid.

Smith told The Observer: “The argument that has kicked off this week is absolutely right and it really is hard, particularly for emerging artists, to make a decent amount of money. The streaming model should be able to work to the benefit of performers. We’d like to see a realignment of the intellectual property rights that govern all this in order to be fairer to artists”.

By that latter line, Smith is basically proposing the idea that a ‘neighbouring right’ royalty be applied to streaming income, similar to that which exists on public performance and broadcast revenue, that is paid directly to any artists involved in a recording, oblivious of their contracts with the label which released and probably owns the record. Such rights do not apply to record sales money and, by extension, streaming income.

He continued: “In the world of BBC radio and commercial radio, licensed [the collecting societes], there is a division of that licence between record companies and performers that includes everyone from the famous artists right down to the triangle player, and we’d like to see something similar for this kind of thing”.

The Musicians’ Union has welcomed a new proposal being considered by the European Parliament to force certain standards on the airline sector regards the transport of musical instruments.

As previously reported, this is an area the MU has been lobbying on for sometime, with many musicians finding rules regarding taking instruments on flights – which currently vary from airline to airline – confusing and frustrating, and sometimes prohibitively expensive, with additional fees, where they are charged, sometimes only apparent when the musician arrives at the airport.

The confusion often covers both putting instruments in the hold and taking them on board as hand luggage (and for some musicians with instruments of high financial or emotional value, the prospect of having them stored in the hold is not especially attractive).

The MU agreed standards on the issue with the Department Of Transport in 2006 that would apply to flights under the UK jurisdiction, but those guidelines still arguably allow for too more variation between airlines, plus are not so useful when rules vary all over Europe. Since then the US has forced standards onto airlines based there.

The proposals currently being considered by the European Parliament would revise so called Air Passenger Rights so that “the air carriers must accept smaller instruments into the passenger cabin and must clearly indicate the terms and conditions for the transport of larger instruments in the cargo hold”.

Welcoming the latest developments in this domain, MU General Secretary John Smith told CMU: “I am delighted that the European Parliament looks set to adopt this proposal, which will make such a difference to working musicians.

He added: “The MU has been lobbying on this issue for years and actually reached an agreement with the Department for Transport in 2006, but we have long been saying that it is only by working at a European and international level that we can successfully tackle this issue, as the problem is much broader than just UK airlines. The problem has always been that existing law allows each airline to set their own policy regarding musical instrument, and this proposal would bring much needed uniformity and fairness to the whole sector”.

The Musicians’ Union’s Executive Committee elected a new Chair last week in the form of jazz guitarist Kathy Dyson, who has the somewhat-late-in-history honour of being the first woman to ever fulfil that role. Dyson has already been on the MU’s Exec Committee for ten years. The group, elected by the Union’s membership, oversees and scrutinises the organisation’s activities and decisions.

Confirming her new appointment, Dyson told CMU: “It is a great honour to have been elected as Chair of the Executive Committee at such an important time for musicians and the wider music industry. It is also a historic moment for the MU, which has its first female Executive Committee Chair, and I would like to take the opportunity to urge other female MU members to become active in the running of their union”.

Meanwhile MU General Secretary John Smith added: “I am delighted to welcome Kathy Dyson as our new Executive Committee Chair. In this historic year where the union is celebrating its 120th anniversary, it is fitting that we should have appointed our first female EC Chair”.

The UK government this morning published its plans to reform British copyright law in response to last year’s Hargreaves Review of intellectual property. In particular, new ‘fair dealing’ exemptions will be introduced, including a ‘private copy right’ without compensation. These measures are likely to be unpopular with much of the music rights and other content industries. Read more about the report here, and responses from the UK music community below…

Musicians’ Union General Secretary John Smith on the proposed private copy right without compensation for rights owners: “While we understand the need for this exception to bring the law into line with consumer behaviour, we feel strongly that the lack of fair compensation will significantly disadvantage creators and performers in relation to the vast majority of their EU counterparts. It is a sobering thought that, despite an outstanding international reputation for British musicians, most MU members earn less than £20,000 a year from their profession. According to PRS for Music, 90% of UK composers earn less than £5,000 from songwriting royalties. Some extra income generated under a fair compensation scheme for format shifting, as happens in Europe, finding its way into the pocket of an individual musician or composer, would be of real significance in this context”.

He continues: “Why would the UK Government want to discriminate against its own creators? Particularly since the creative economy is one of the consistent areas of economic growth. Research commissioned by UK Music earlier this year clearly demonstrates the value of being able to play music copied from CD as a feature on MP3 players, phones and tablets. What we are arguing for is fair compensation for musicians from the device manufacturers. These manufacturers are already paying for patents on each device sold, and yet the act of copying onto these devices the ‘software’ the consumer is most interested in – music – is not currently generating any income for musicians, unless it is through legitimate download purchases. This hardly seems fair – after all, what use is an iPod or an mp3 player without the music?”

British Academy of Songwriters, Composers & Authors Chair Sarah Rodgers, also on the private copy right issue: “Composers and songwriters depend on the protection of copyright to enable them to earn a living from their musical works. Copyright is the legislative framework that for us music writers is the same as being employed – in other words, it’s the way that we get paid for the work that we do. An exception to copyright, without compensation, for us, is employment without payment. The creative economy is not supported by denying income to its workers. This decision makes songwriters and composers vulnerable to erosion of the value of our creative works and what we are able to earn from their use. It is wrong from both a commercial and a moral standpoint and puts us out of step with our European counterparts”.

Not getting drawn into the specifics just yet, the CEO of record labels trade body BPI, Geoff Taylor: “Record labels are digital businesses and want consumers to be free to enjoy their music legally on all their devices. That’s why we have already licensed a range of online storage services from Apple, Google and Amazon amongst others. We support a sensible updating of copyright for the digital age and will look at the detail of government’s [more specific] proposals, to be published next year, to ensure that they support licensing of innovative new services and do not have unintended consequences for the UK’s economically important creative sector”.

The Musicians’ Union has published a new report on pay levels for self-employed professional musicians, showing that over half take home annual earnings of under £20,000, while 60% have had to work for free in the past year. The latter stat links in to the MU’s previously reported ‘Work Not Play’ campaign, which aims to explain why professional musicians cannot and should not be expected to play for free.

Commenting on his organisation’s ‘The Working Musician’ report, MU General Secretary John Smith called on the government to do more to support music, both through arts subsidy, but also by doing more to tackle piracy, which he says affects grass roots musicians as well as big rights owners.

Smith told CMU: “So many of the MU’s members are SMEs battling against a tide of arts cuts and reduced income due to piracy. Small but significant investment by Government could make all the difference in the struggle to survive. What’s also interesting is that of the musicians surveyed who receive royalty payments; over half said that they represented an important additional source of income for them. This finally puts paid to the argument that ordinary musicians do not benefit from copyright”.

The Musicians’ Union has launched a new campaign under the banner ‘Work Not Play’, in a bid to explain why musicians cannot and should not be expected to play for free.

The campaign follows criticism from various quarters, and especially the MU, about various Olympic-themed events this summer that asked musicians to contribute their time for free, or for next to nothing. But the Union says that its members face the expectation of working for free all the time, because many people see playing music as a hobby rather than a job.

MU General Secretary John Smith told CMU: “We are concerned at a growing trend of professional musicians not being paid for their work. In this era of illegal downloading, live revenue is incredibly important and musicians rely on it to be able to survive”.

He adds: “Too many people seem to think that music and entertainment are a hobby rather than a career, and are unaware of the years of training and hard work that it takes to become a professional performer. It is difficult enough to earn a decent living as a professional musician these days, and, headline artists aside, it is not a highly paid profession. We’re looking to challenge the idea that musicians should be happy to work for free, and we’re delighted that so many musicians and music fans are joining up to this campaign”.

John Smith has been re-elected as General Secretary of the Musicians’ Union after a decade in the job. The former tuba player for the English National Opera will continue in the top job at the MU for the next five years following this latest election. He was also re-elected as President of the International Federation of Musicians.

Smith told CMU: “I am delighted to have been re-elected as MU General Secretary and I look forward to continuing my work over the next five years. In the current difficult economic climate, the MU is more important than ever and I am committed to ensuring that we continue to give the best possible service to our 30,000 members”.

He continued: “Musicians are currently facing some very difficult issues – such as increasingly being expected to work for free, dealing with devastating cuts to arts funding and facing the damaging effects of illegal downloading. 76% of musicians earn less than £30,000 a year, and my priority over my next five year term is to improve pay for musicians across the board”.

The grass roots live sector is feeling optimistic today that the Live Music Act, which comes into effect in England and Wales on Monday, could have a quick, tangible, positive results. As much previously reported, the live music legislation removes some of the bureaucracy introduced by the 2003 Licensing Act, forms and paperwork which many grass roots musicians said led to many smaller music venues, especially cafes and bars that used to host live music, to stop doing so, reducing the opportunities for artists to play live.

As the act – which stemmed from a private members bill put forward by Lib Dem Lord Tim Clement-Jones, and which was approved by parliament in March – goes properly live, the Musician’s Union has launched a ‘Live Music Kit’, which aims to encourage and enable smaller venues that are now able to stage live music without any tedious form filling to do just that. Available online and in print, it outlines how the provisions of the act work, presents the business case for staging music, and offers tips on how to stage music events.

MU General Secretary John Smith told CMU: “The implementation of the Live Music Act signifies an exciting time for both venues and musicians, who can use the opportunity to work together to create a growing audience and profile, and long-term success. As research undertaken by PRS For Music has shown, live music can be hugely beneficial for pubs – pubs without featured music being three times more likely to close than pubs with featured music. At a time when many working musicians are struggling, and events such as the Olympics and Jubilee celebrations seem to have brought about only unpaid gigs, this exemption is great news for them because I am confident that it will bring about a real resurgence in live music in pubs and other small venues”.

He continued: “Small venues are, after all, the places where most musicians start their careers and so promoting opportunities for live performance in small venues protects the career progression of musicians in the UK. We also believe that live music performance is an essential aspect of culture in the UK and that it should be promoted in its own right. This is why the Live Music Act is so important, and we hope that the Live Music Kit will help venues to make the most of the new exemption”.

Earlier this month cross-sector trade body UK Music published research that said that up to 13,000 British venues could stage live music for the first time as a result of the Act, and that a further 20,400 might step up their output. Though the research, by The Market Research Group at the University Of Bournemouth, said that awareness of the Act amongst the people and companies running premises that could now stage music without the red tape was relatively low, hence the need for initiatives like that just announced by the MU.

On publishing that research, UK Music CEO Jo Dipple said: “The results of this baseline research are very exciting. The act, as we had hoped, has a potentially huge impact on the live music scene. The purpose of this legislation is to encourage more live music performances. Small venues will no longer have to apply to their local authority to stage live music. The act will mean that the staging of live music will be cheaper and easier for venues up and down the country. UK Music has committed to working with the Musicians’ Union on an awareness campaign for venues and artists to ensure that the act has the biggest impact. We also look forward to working with government on the implementation of the act”.

The Trade Union Congress, meeting in Brighton this week, has backed a motion by the Musicians’ Union which states that professional musicians should not be expected to work for free, and will back the MU in its campaign to remind people that musicians shouldn’t be any more expected to provide their services gratis than any other skilled professional.

The MU called for TUC support in this campaign partly in response to the number of Olympic initiatives that asked musicians to give their time without payment.

MU General Secretary John Smith told CMU: “The MU believes that too many people seem to think that music and entertainment are a hobby rather than a career, and are unaware of the years of training and hard work that it takes to become a professional performer. This leads to performers being asked or expected to work for free in far too many instances”.

“This summer’s Olympic Games brought the issue back to the fore. Despite the agreement between LOCOG and the TUC regarding fair terms and conditions, and undertakings from LOGOG to the MU that professional musicians would be paid for their services, the MU uncovered countless examples of its members being asked to perform for no payment at events connected with the Games”.

“It is difficult enough to earn a decent living as a professional musician these days, and, headline artists aside, it is not a highly paid profession. The MU is looking to challenge the idea that musicians should be happy to work for free, and we are delighted that the TUC has joined with us in this campaign”.

The Musicians’ Union has called on artists and musicians across the UK to turn down any offers to play for free as part of this summer’s Olympics festivities.

It follows a number of reports from musicians around the country that they have been approached by people involved in Olympic ventures who have asked that they play live, or licence their recordings for sync, for free, or next to nothing, because an involvement in Britain’s big sporty debacle will be “good promotion”. PPL Chairman Fran Nevrkla mentioned reports of such approaches at the collecting society’s AGM earlier this month, calling the offers “shameful and deeply offensive”. Meanwhile the MU says such offers go against previous commitments made by LOCOG, the body running the London Games, which said any musicians involved would be paid.

One artist told the Corporate Watch website: “They [Olympic organisers] said they were really keen for us to play on major stages at different events. We replied quoting our normal fees. After months of meetings they offered us a raft of gigs but said it was LOCOG’s policy not to pay any musicians for performing. They should stop trying to capitalise on the image of the Olympics and pay a fair rate for our services”.

Meanwhile The Quietus, which has been following this story closely, has heard from a musician approached about a sync arrangement (quite why artists would be approached directly for such deals isn’t clear, as most acts would be in contract with a label and publisher who would control such arrangements, but there you go).

The Quietus writes: “His group had been approached regarding the use of one of their songs to accompany footage to be shown on screens in the various venues in the Olympic Park. The fee [for usage for] the rest of the year… a princely £250 to the artist. The Quietus learns that £250 per master usage and publishing is the standard rate being offered [for] music syncs at the Olympic site, with the you-can’t-bank-it carrot of exposure being used as the reason for the low fees. Our source described the offer as ‘beyond insulting’ and, needless to say, his band’s music will not be featured at the Olympics”.

Responding to the various reports of Olympic events asking for freebies from musicians, the MU said yesterday: “This is completely unacceptable and the MU is urging any musician who is approached to call their MU Regional Office and report it. We are chasing every single example with LOCOG, and we are also going public where appropriate. We are also in touch with the TUC, as LOCOG signed a Principles Of Cooperation with them which specifically states that professional workers will be paid for their services and are distinct from the unpaid volunteer workforce”.

Meanwhile the Union’s Assistant General Secretary Horace Trubridge told CMU: “LOCOG have repeatedly told us that all professional musicians will be paid, and yet we’ve seen example after example of them breaking their word. If they want musicians to entertain thousands of people then they should pay for it. It is difficult enough to earn a decent living as a professional musician these days – where does this idea come from that musicians should be happy to work for free? Who else would be?”

He added: “We need as many musicians as possible to come forward about this so that we can put as much pressure on LOCOG as possible. We will also be bringing it to the attention of the general public so that they can decide whether they think it’s fair that musicians are not being paid whilst most of the other professionals involved are”.

Rising concerns about the treatment of musicians by LOCOG came as the Olympics body announced that a Muse track, called ‘Survival’, would be the official song of the games. Possibly a tribute to all those hard-working musicians who somehow survive despite having to play the London games, with its multi-billion pound budget and vast family of big business sponsors, for free.

So, as previously reported, yesterday media regulator OfCom published the latest long-time-coming draft of its Obligations Code stemming from the copyright section of the 2010 Digital Economy Act, the bit that puts in place the first elements of a three-strikes system for combating online file-sharing. The Code sets out the obligations of internet service providers to send letters to suspected file-sharers telling them they are very bad people and really ought to stop.

While the Act itself was rushed through parliament to ensure it was approved before the 2010 General Election, getting the three-strikes elements of it going has been a slow and tedious affair, hindered in part by the so far unsuccessful attempts of BT and TalkTalk to force the DEA’s copyright provisions off the statute book through the courts.

A redraft of a document original put together back in 2010, the latest version of the Code clarifies the ways rights owners will monitor net usage, what information internet service providers will provide accused file-sharers in warning letters, and how net customers can appeal if they believe they have been falsely accused. OfCom will now consult interested parties about the new draft of the Code, before checking the provisions with the European Commission and then presenting it to parliament later this year.

Representatives from various content industry trade bodies, which have lobbied hard for the DEA and a so called ‘graduated response’ system for combating online piracy, and all of which have been getting rather frustrated of late with continued delays in getting three-strikes going, welcomed yesterday’s new draft. And here they are saying so…

Jo Dipple, Chief Executive at cross sector trade body UK Music: “The UK music industry welcomes today’s publication of the Costs SI and Initial Obligations Code. Our aim is to grow the digital market and encourage the use of licensed online music services. The Digital Economy Act will play a significant part in achieving this goal. With its implementation back on track we look forward to working with government, OfCom and other stakeholders in the weeks and months ahead”.

John Smith, General Secretary of the Musicians’ Union: “We now have a great opportunity through the DEA to educate consumers about how to avoid illegal sites, access legitimate content which is widely available, and protect themselves online. We urge ISPs to begin building their systems now and to work constructively with rights holders, OfCom and government to get notice-sending up and running as soon as possible”.

Geoff Taylor, Chief Executive at record label trade body BPI: “It’s time to get down to business and start implementing the law to educate consumers about illegal downloading, so that artists and creators are fairly rewarded for their hard work”.

John McVay, Chief Executive at film industry body PACT: “Much has been said about the DEA which is simply untrue. Like many other countries, we are taking action to turn the tide against the growth in online copyright theft – the single largest threat facing our sector. The DEA is a legal, proportionate and reasonable measure – a fact that has been confirmed by the High Court and the Court of Appeal”.

Richard Mollet, Chief Executive at book industry trade body the Publishers Association (and the former BPI lobbyist who pushed particularly hard for the DEA back in 2010): “Infringing copyright blights the creative industries and threatens investment and jobs. The sooner we get this law into action the better”.

Christine Payne, General Secretary of actors union Equity: “It’s a good day for the UK’s two million workers in the creative sector. Two important steps have been taken, following two years of delay, that bring us closer to notice sending under the Digital Economy Act becoming a reality. These measures are vital to protect the jobs and livelihoods of workers in the creative industries and will help ensure we continue to make high quality creative content in the UK. We will be studying the detail of today’s Costs SI and Code carefully and look forward to working with the government and OfCom to progress them as quickly as possible”.

Needless to say, long-term critics of the DEA’s copyright provisions were less welcoming of the latest draft, even though OfCom would argue that it has introduced measures to protect net users as well as copyright owners. Most opponents have honed in on the appeals process outlined in the code, because the new draft actually narrows the grounds on which an accused file-sharer can dispute allegations made against them (and they will still have to pay £20 for the privilege).

Though, that said, at this stage the only ‘strike-three’ sanction available to rights owners is to sue persistent file-sharers for copyright infringement (as they could already), and if any such cases got to court wider arguments would have to be considered.

Responding negatively to the latest code, Open Rights Group’s Jim Killock said: “Digital revenues are going up, the music and film industry are moving in the right direction, yet this cumbersome policy is still lumbering forward. OfCom are being asked to put lipstick on a pig with this code. The appeals are a joke. The government has decided that ‘I didn’t do it’ is not a defence. Some people will almost certainly end up in court having done nothing wrong”.

The Musicians’ Union has welcomed the signing of a new global intellectual property agreement in Beijing designed to provide performers in audio-visual productions both economic and moral rights in their work when distributed internationally. The agreement, signed by 46 countries, is really designed to extend the rights of actors in internationally distributed films, though will also benefit musicians who appear in audio-visual work.

The treaty, some twelve years in development, was signed at a conference held in the Chinese capital by the World Intellectual Property Organisation. That body’s Director General, Francis Gurry, told reporters: “The conclusion of the Beijing Treaty is an important milestone toward closing the gap in the international rights system for audio-visual performers and reflects the collaborative nature of the multilateral process. The international copyright framework will no longer discriminate against one set of performers”.

Welcoming the new agreement from a musicians point of view, John Smith, General Secretary of the UK’s Musicians’ Union and President of the International Federation Of Musicians, told CMU: “Being present at the historic WIPO Diplomatic Conference on the Protection Of Audiovisual Performances in Beijing has been a great honour. This week the WIPO member states have agreed a treaty which extends the protection of performers’ intellectual property rights, already enjoyed in audio productions and live performance, to audiovisual productions. This means that for the first time performers will enjoy both economic and moral rights in all of their recorded and live work”.

Calling on the European Union and UK to implement its new international obligations into relevant domestic laws quickly, he continued: “Music is an integral and important part of audio-visual productions and the community of musicians will most definitely benefit from the adoption of this important treaty. We hope that the EU and UK government ratify and implement it at the earliest opportunity”.

The Musician’s Union has supported a recent petition from the International Federation Of Musicians calling for action across Europe on the previously reported issue of musicians taking musical instruments on planes.

As previously reported, musicians are frustrated that rules regards taking instruments on board as hand luggage vary from airline to airline, making it difficult planning international trips with valuable instruments that performers are unwilling to put in the hold. The MU has lobbied the UK government on the issue previously, and in theory the Department Of Transport has made moves to address the problem, though the Union says some airlines continue to set their own arbitrary rules.

Commenting on the new petition, John Smith, General Secretary of the MU and President of FIM, told CMU: “It is only by working at a European and international level that we can successfully tackle this issue, and that is why today’s petition from FIM is so important. Just a few months ago we saw the US Congress introduce a uniform national policy regarding musical instruments on airplanes – we need to see similar action in Europe. The problem is that existing law allows each airline to set their own policy regarding musical instruments – which we have seen recently with BA. We need uniformity and fairness across the whole sector”.

]]>http://www.completemusicupdate.com/article/mu-supports-european-petition-on-air-travel-with-musical-instruments/feed/0MU publishes open letter in support of axed Radio Scotland showhttp://www.completemusicupdate.com/article/mu-publishes-open-letter-in-support-of-axed-radio-scotland-show/
http://www.completemusicupdate.com/article/mu-publishes-open-letter-in-support-of-axed-radio-scotland-show/#commentsThu, 03 May 2012 10:58:17 +0000http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/?p=49996

[Click for full details]]]>

The Musicians Union has hit out at BBC Scotland’s decision to axe a specialist music show called ‘Global Gathering’. Presented by Mary Ann Kennedy, the MU says the radio programme “has played a fundamental and unique role in the musical life of Scotland for over a decade, bringing together the various strands of Scotland’s musical identity, from indigenous roots to newest innovation, far flung diaspora to welcomed refugee, community movement to the biggest concert stages”.

In an open letter signed by a plethora of musicians, music people and MSPs, supporters of the show say: “Mary Ann Kennedy and producer Sean Purser have been at the forefront of the movement to position Scotland’s contemporary music on a global stage – from KT Tunstall’s earliest radio sessions to the legacy of the programme’s spiritual inspiration, Martyn Bennett; revelling in the successes of Karine Polwart, Lau, Salsa Celtica, thePeatbog Faeries and many others to breaking ambitious new acts such as The Treacherous Orchestra, India Alba and Man’s Ruin”.

They continued: “[Kennedy and Purser] also connect to the grassroots of Scotland’s many communities – from the Balkan diaspora to the country’s long-established Asian community and all points round the globe – a vital human connection promoting understanding through music. Without Mary Ann Kennedy’s ‘Global Gathering’, BBC Radio Scotland will have no music programme which adequately reflects the cultural diversity of contemporary Scotland, no female presenters presenting any of their specialist music strands and no specialist traditional music producers in their Glasgow headquarters”.

Anger has been brewing in the Scottish music community since the BBC first announced its intent to axe the ‘Global Gathering’ show back in February. There was originally talk of the programme ending last month, but it’s still in the schedules at the moment, so presumably the MU hopes that with a bit of pressure from both the musical and political communities, the show can still be rescued.

Tim Clement-Jones’s Live Music Bill became the Live Music Act yesterday, a considerable achievement for what was, after all, a private member’s bill – such legislative proposals usually being a mere side show to entertain MPs and test parliamentary opinion. It took two goes of course, and was aided second time round by albeit lukewarm government support, but nevertheless, well done to Jones in the Lords and his counterpart in the Commons, Don Foster.

As previously reported, the Live Music Bill will remove some of the bureaucracy attached to gigs in smaller venues, much of which was introduced by the 2003 Licensing Act. In particular, venues under a 200 person capacity will no longer need local authority permission for music gigs between the hours of 8am and 11pm, and where music is not amplified there will be no capacity limit for that rule.

Many feel that bureaucracy has deterred some venue owners, especially pub landlords, from staging music nights in recent years, cutting off a valuable platform for new and alterative talent. With numerous specific grass roots music venues around the country, especially in the regional cities, currently going to the wall (however much you read about the still buoyant live sector), it’s more important than ever that all pubs, clubs and such like are encouraged to stage live music.

The new act is likely to come into effect this autumn, meaning it won’t be up and running in time for this summer’s Diamond Jubilee and Olympic celebrations. Some, who see those major events as a great opportunity for grass roots performers to reach a new audience, are disappointed the new rules won’t be introduced before the summer. But the Act’s supporters agree it is more important the altered rules are introduced in a controlled way, to ensure there are no hitches as councils employ the new systems.

Welcoming the Live Music Act’s ascendancy into law yesterday, the boss of one of the bodies who campaigned for the new law, UK Music’s Jo Dipple, told CMU: “For a private member’s bill to receive royal assent is a monumental achievement, even more so for one that is introduced in the House Of Lords. This has happened only five times in the past decade. The assent of today’s Act is the result of a dogged commitment to musicians combined with outstanding parliamentary skills. UK Music thanks Lord Clement-Jones and Don Foster MP for their work”.

She continued: “The global success of our industry is dependent on a flourishing network of small venues, where tomorrow’s headliners can learn their craft and develop their career. Allowing these venues the freedom to host live music is a huge boost for British artists and means more opportunities for developing talent, as well as enriching our local communities and the economy overall”.

Meanwhile John Smith, General Secretary of the Musician’s Union, added: “We would like to thank all of the MPs and Lords who have been involved in this process. The MU has been lobbying for changes to the Licensing Act for many years now, and this exemption is fantastic news for musicians and will be a real boost for live music. We look forward to the implementation of the Act later this year and we will be working with the government to ensure that the Act has maximum impact”.

Concurrent to all this, the government itself is also reviewing licensing rules, so a further relaxation of regulation could come up further down the line somewhere. Though, as previously reported, none of this applies north of the border in Scotland, where grass roots promoters are facing a change in licensing rules in the other direction that could add to the bureaucracy involved in staging small events, including free gigs. Councils around Scotland are considering how to put new rules passed by the Scottish Parliament into effect as we speak. Meanwhile, in Edinburgh, a day of creative protest about the new licensing arrangements is planned for 1 Apr.

The Musicians’ Union has called on the UK government to consider legislation to match that recently passed in the US that creates industry-wide standards regarding the carriage of musical instruments on aeroplanes.

This is an area the MU has been lobbying on for sometime, many musicians finding rules regarding taking instruments on flights – which currently vary from airline to airline – confusing and frustrating, and sometimes prohibitively expensive, with additional fees, where they are charged, sometimes only apparent when the musician arrives at the airport.

The confusion often covers both putting instruments in the hold and taking them on board as hand luggage (and for some musicians with instruments of high financial or emotional value, the prospect of having them stored in the hold is not especially attractive).

The MU agreed standards on the issue with the Department Of Transport in 2006 that would apply to flights under the UK jurisdiction, but those standards were merely guidelines, so many airlines still operate their own rules on this matter, some more consistently than others. In the US new laws force standards across the airline industry.

Calling for something similar in the UK, MU General Secretary John Smith told CMU: “We call on the UK government to consider introducing a similar act regarding instruments on planes as has just been passed in the US. Such a policy would make a huge difference to the lives of musicians, who often face a lottery when they fly with an instrument”.

He stressed the biggest issue – over and above any fees musicians have to pay for the transit of their instruments – was the inconsistency on rules and fees.

He continued: “The main problem is the inconsistency between airports and airline staff. You might be allowed to take your instrument into the cabin with you at no extra cost, but then be charged an extortionate fee to put it into the hold on your return flight. This is particularly unfair given that most airlines allow sports equipment, such as skis, to travel for free. For a working musician, the fee can mean the difference between a concert or gig making or losing money – and that’s without even counting the potential cost of a damaged instrument”.

With literally minutes to spare, and after a lengthy discussion on the weighty issue of the time space continuum (well, on the proposal the UK adopt mainland European time), the House Of Commons passed the Live Music Bill on Friday. The proposed legislation now has one last call at the House Of Lords where amendments will be considered, but the Bill’s parliamentary supporters say that is a routine process, and the new laws will almost certainly now proceed for Royal Assent.

This should be good news for the grass roots music community, who can expect to see the bureaucracy around small scale live music events, much of it introduced by the 2003 Licensing Act, drastically reduced, the hope being that simpler licensing rules will encourage more pubs and such like to stage music events involving grass roots musicians.

The Bill was introduced into parliament via the Lords by Tim Clement-Jones, and sponsored in the Commons by his Liberal Democrat colleague Don Foster. Although the proposals had proven uncontroversial in parliament, certainly since the Bill’s second submission following the last General Election, it was a private members bill, and such proposals have a very limited amount of parliamentary time set aside for them, meaning allotted slots can run out before all the required debates, amendments and votes have taken place. Clement-Jones’s bill got close to suffering that fate, but with enough MPs in attendance and the daylight saving debate finishing just in time, it passed what was basically the final hurdle on Friday.

Welcoming the vote in the Commons, Jo Dipple, acting CEO of UK Music, which has been lobbying MPs to support the Bill, told CMU: “This is a great day for music. The Live Music Bill will make a real and positive difference to lives of musicians. There is no doubt that the current Licensing Act has created needless layers of bureaucracy – making it complicated and expensive for pubs and other small venues to host live gigs. The entire industry would like to thank Lord Clement-Jones and Don Foster MP who have made this change possible”.

John Smith, General Secretary of the Musicians Union, which has also been lobbying for the new live music rules, added: “We are delighted that the Live Music Bill has finally made it through Parliament. It is a real achievement for a Private Member’s Bill to get through and the MU would like to thank Lord Clement-Jones, Don Foster and all of the other MPs who helped to pass this Bill. Over the past few years our members have been telling us that the number of gigs available to young musicians who are still perfecting their craft has gone down. This is primarily due to a reduction in the number of smaller venues which traditionally offered this level of gig, and is directly linked to the Licensing Act. The exemption that the Live Music Bill introduces will be hugely beneficial to these small venues”.

Meanwhile the aforementioned Don Foster told CMU: “The current system has had a deadening effect on the performance of live music in small venues. At the moment, the landlord of a small pub could face a big fine and imprisonment for letting a customer play a piano without a licence. The support received this afternoon from all MPs from all political parties just goes to show how important live music is in our country and the overwhelming support for changing our obstructive licensing laws. We’re now only one step away from the Bill becoming law and creating an even more vibrant and successful live music culture. This will benefit hundreds of small pubs, restaurants, schools, churches and community halls, and strengthen the British music scene immensely”.

Geoff Taylor, boss of record label trade body the BPI: “This important decision comes not a moment too soon. An exceptional period of British musical genius was about to lose its protection. As a matter of principle, it is right that our musicians should benefit from their creativity during their lifetimes, and that they should not be disadvantaged compared to musicians in other countries. A longer copyright term is also good news for music fans, as it will ensure that UK record labels can continue to reinvest income from sales of early recordings in supporting new British talent and compete effectively in a global market”.

Alison Wenham, boss of the Association Of Independent Music: “Providing near parity with other members of the music industry, in terms of how long their copyrights can continue to earn them income and enjoy protection throughout their careers has been the goal. Copyright term extension to 70 years achieves this goal, and gives the European music community a much needed boost”.

Helen Smith, Executive Chair of pan-European indie labels trade body IMPALA: “Narrowing the copyright gap with the USA and other territories is an essential move for Europe to capitalise on its world-leading position in creating music. Those most affected by the extension will be hundreds of thousands of individual artists and performers, as well as thousands of micro, small and medium-sized music companies which produce so much of the innovative and diverse music released in Europe today (80% of all new music is released by independent labels). At a time when certain interests seek to weaken copyright for their own purposes, this sends a vital message that the right of creators to earn a living is taken seriously by the EU”.

Plácido Domingo, in his new guise as Chairman of the International Federation Of The Phonographic Industry: “The decision to extend the term of protection for recordings in Europe is great news for performing artists. Artists at the start of their careers will benefit from an increased pool of revenue that will be available to invest in new talent. Established artists can benefit from their work throughout their lifetimes. This is especially important today when licensed digital services make music widely available online. Extension of protection also reflects the important role performers play in the success of songs by narrowing the gap between the protection offered to recorded performances and that offered to compositions”.

Fran Nevrkla, CEO of UK recording rights collecting society PPL: “This is a tremendous development and we must recognise the goodwill of the politicians in Britain and other parts of Europe who understood that this key change in the copyright legislation was long overdue. I am delighted that we at PPL, jointly with our many thousands of individual performer and record company members, have been able to play an important role in this process. It is not possible to overstate the effectiveness of the sterling work by many individual PPL performers who signed copyright petitions, lobbied parliament here and in Brussels, and generally remained completely engaged and determined to succeed. This copyright change will mean that the PPL income streams will continue to flow through to the whole community of recording artists, orchestral players, session musicians, backing singers and other performers for an additional period of 20 years which is so important, especially when those individuals reach ripe old age and are no longer able to exercise their profession. The enhanced copyright framework will also enable the record companies, big and small, to continue investing in new recordings and new talent”.

John Smith, General Secretary of the Musicians’ Union: “This represents a major step forwards that will be welcomed by all recording musicians. It provides some acknowledgement of the important contribution that performers make to the European creative industries, as well as recognising the current discrepancy that exists between the copyright regime and performers rights. We have campaigned for this not on behalf of a handful of extremely rich, well-known artists, but on behalf of a huge number of highly skilled session musicians who were being short changed under the current system”.

Feargal Sharkey, boss of cross-sector trade body UK Music: “This is great news. I’d like to thank all the politicians who have stuck at this and finally voted for companies and particularly jobbing musicians for whom the extra 20 years of revenue will mean a great deal. And beyond the important realities of the commercial considerations, it’s great that recorded music gets the cultural recognition it deserves bringing those rights more in line with the rights of other areas of the creative arts”.

Stephen Navin, chief at the Music Publishers’ Association: “We welcome today’s decision by the Council to adopt this important directive, and as the creators, promoters and guardians of musical works publishers will in particular welcome the move to harmonise the treatment of co-written works across Europe. Not only will this decision afford greater protection to these works, it will also help to clear the path towards more efficient multi-territorial licensing. This simplification provides clarity to the benefit of both rights owners and music users alike as we gather pace towards the creation of a global repertoire database for musical works. Harmony, clarity, growth, enlightened EU legislation – a unique combination!”

Patrick Rackow, CEO of the British Academy Of Songwriters, Composers And Authors: “BASCA welcomes any move which signifies a commitment to the ongoing importance of copyright. On behalf of our members, we thoroughly support this latest development”.

Sheila Bromberg, a life-long session musician who worked with The Beatles among many others: “As a working musician who recorded with a number of well known artists, particularly in the 60s and 70s, this 20 year extension granted to recordings finally recognises and more fairly rewards the work I did all those years ago. It may not be huge sums of money but to an OAP as I am, it is welcome”.

Les Reed, musician and composer: “To say that I was totally overcome by the wonderful news of the extension of copyright for performers, from 50 to 70 years is, without doubt, the understatement of the century! I know that I speak on behalf of all my fellow musicians/performers, when I say that without the tremendous work carried out by PPL on our behalf, against opposition, this situation would never have evolved. Thanks to PPL, we can all be assured that true justice has taken place and we will all be eternally grateful. Having personally been involved in session work as pianist/musical director/arranger since 1958, I now don’t have to worry that our John Barry Seven, Adam Faith, Tom Jones and Engelbert Humperdinck recordings, amongst others, are jeopardised for at least another 20 years”.

Jim Killock of the Open Rights Group, which advocates copyright reform in favour of users: “Term extension is a cultural disaster. Research showed that around 90% of the cash windfall from copyright levies will fall into the hands of record labels. Despite the rhetoric, small artists will gain very little from this, while our cultural heritage takes a massive blow by denying us full access to these recordings for another generation. The government examined the evidence on this question twice – in the Gowers Review and Hargreaves – and both were highly sceptical. Hargreaves – only a matter of months ago – pointed out that copyright policy needs to be based on evidence, and that for copyright term extension, there was no real evidence of benefit. While Hargreaves shied away, probably for political reasons, from recommending changing course back to rejection, the report was very damning”.

Andrew Robinson, Culture Spokesman for The Pirate Party, which advocates radical copyright reform in favour of users: “There can be no justification for this change, other than sheer greed on behalf of record companies. Copyright law is normally justified by saying that artists need to be compensated for their work, or they wouldn’t make music, but virtually the whole of modern pop music was produced under the 50 year term. Extending the rights of Elvis, Hendrix, and Amy Winehouse won’t get them to produce more work. All this copyright extension will do is channel more money into the pockets of record company executives, at the cost of depriving the public access to work for which the record companies have already been paid. This change will simply mean the music industry will rely more on their back catalogue, rather than investing in new artists. While EU politicians may do what the IFPI wants, the public they are supposed to represent grow increasingly sceptical of perpetually extended copyright. Lobbyists may be able to buy the laws they want, but growth of the Pirate Party movement shows that the public will not put up with corruption forever”.

Various representatives of the music business have welcomed the government’s latest consultation on entertainment licensing, which it’s hoped will, once and for all, remove bureaucracy put in place by the 2003 Licensing Act that makes it harder for grass roots gigs to take place.

As much previously reported, red tape introduced by the 2003 Act has had a negative impact on the number of pubs and such like staging music events, reducing the number of opportunities for grass roots musicians to play live. Various government and parliamentary reports have supported reducing the amount of bureaucracy associated with smaller gigs, and Lord Tim Clement-Jones’ Live Music Bill made proposals as to how that could be done.

Although you might wonder – we did – whether the government really needs yet another consultation on this issue, given the reports that have gone before and Clement-Jones’s bill, which is still working its way through parliament, various music business reps have welcomed the announcement last week by Tourism & Heritage Minister John Penrose that his department will again consult, mainly because of increased optimism that this time something might actually be done about the unnecessary elements of the 2003 Act.

Having already spoken to The Guardian about the consultation last week, UK Music’s Feargal Sharkey told CMU over the weekend: “Earlier this year, UK Music highlighted how large-scale live music attracts £1.4bn of tourism to the UK. However, the success of our festivals and arenas – indeed, the success of our entire industry – is reliant upon a vibrant grass roots music scene. This is where raw talent emerges. We are therefore delighted that government has adopted such a forward-thinking approach. Enabling live music to flourish has potential to drive social cohesion, entrepreneurialism and economic growth. While continuing to support Lord Clement-Jones’ Live Music Bill, UK Music warmly welcomes this consultation and all other measures that would remove red tape for the benefit of musicians and creative talent”.

Musicians’ Union top man John Smith added: “We welcome this consultation and the government’s intention to cut red tape for live music. At the very least, we hope that the result will be to implement an exemption for small venues putting on live music with fewer than 200 people in attendance, which we have been lobbying for for many years now. We therefore also support the proposals outlined in Lord Clement-Jones’ Live Music Bill, which [proposes such an exemption]”.

Meanwhile Live Nation exec Paul Latham, speaking as head of the UK Live Music Group, which brings together various live sector trade bodies, said: “Live music provides a huge boost to the UK’s economy and is a significant part of this country’s social fabric. To ensure future success it is vital that we sustain a healthy grass roots scene, where musicians and artists from every region have the widest possible opportunity to build a career. It is pleasing that Government recognises this fact and we look forward to engaging with this consultation in the weeks ahead”.

The Musicians’ Union has announced that it will campaign for the introduction of a private copy levy if the proposal put forward this week by Business Secretary Vince Cable to introduce a private copy right (or ‘format shifting’) law in the UK is approved by the government.

MU General Secretary John Smith told CMU: “We are not opposed to the introduction of an exception for format shifting, as long as a system of fair compensation for rights holders is brought in alongside it. This would bring the UK in line with most other European countries, where such levy systems already exist”.

He continued: “The device manufacturers readily pay for patents and the like on each device sold and yet the act of copying onto these devices the very content that the consumer is most concerned with – music – is not currently generating any income for the creative individuals who compose and perform and entertain the public”.

Record label trade body the BPI and the Musicians’ Union have reached an agreement on new simplified contracts for session musicians, which the two trade bodies say offer musicians enhanced remuneration and labels the increased flexibility they need in the ever changing record industry.

The new contracts, one for studio recordings and one for live recordings, consolidate three old agreements, and it’s hoped will make things easier for labels hiring MU musicians. The contract allows for a basic rate and additional fees, and give labels a broader package of musicians’ consents up front.

Confirming an agreement had been reached, MU General Secretary John Smith told CMU: “We recognise the difficulties that the record industry has faced in recent years. This agreement represents a new way of working, and we hope that it will lead to increased employment in this valuable sector as well as helping to showcase British musicians as amongst the best in the world”.

BPI top dog Geoff Taylor added: “The working partnership between musicians and record labels is at the very heart of the recorded music business. The new agreement delivers greater payments to UK musicians in return for more flexible rights for UK labels, which will make it easier to commercialise recordings in the digital environment. This will help make the UK recorded music industry more competitive and more successful, and secure more work in the UK for our musicians”.

A coalition of rights holders, including record label trade body the BPI and the Musicians’ Union, will represent the content industries at the upcoming judicial review hearing regarding the three-strikes components of last year’s Digital Economy Act.

As previously reported, BT and Talk Talk were last year granted the right to take the copyright components of last year’s DEA to court over allegations the new anti-piracy legislation is in conflict with various aspects of European law. The net firms also argue that the so called ‘graduated response’ approach to tackling file-sharing, in which ISPs will be ordered to send warning letters to suspected file-sharers, with the ultimate threat of net suspensions being introduced for those who fail to heed warnings, was not give sufficient parliamentary scrutiny, as the Labour government rushed the DEA through parliament as the deadline of the then pending General Election approached.

In the alliance of rights owners set to defend the anti-piracy provisions in court are also the Producers’ Alliance For Cinema & Television (or PACT), the Motion Picture Association, the British Video Association, the Film Distributors Association, unions Equity and Bectu, and the Premier League. They will argue that the copyright components of the DEA are essential to ensure the future of Britain’s creative industries.

The alliance was given permission to present its case, or “intervene”, at the judicial review yesterday. For the other side of the debate, lobbying organisation The Open Rights Group will also have a chance to speak up in support of BT and TalkTalk’s opposition to the DEA.

Calling the net firms’ attempts to halt the DEA’s anti-piracy measures in court as a “misconceived case”, John McVay, the boss of one of the content owners in the alliance, PACT, told reporters yesterday: “The act can help repair the damage that illegal downloading causes to the UK creative industry and reduce the threat to the hundreds of thousands of jobs that the creative companies supports. The DEA is the result of many years of consultation and presents a reasonable and balanced solution”.

The Musicians’ Union has announced two new initiatives to help musicians who teach, after the organisation’s Teachers Conference’ in Leeds last week. One initiative will see the launch of a new resource advising those who teach young people music skills outside of the school room on their child protection duties, while the other will see the MU work more closely with website .

Diane Widdison, the MU’s National Organiser for Teaching, told CMU: “People often don’t appreciate how isolated instrumental teachers can feel, and these conferences provide an invaluable opportunity for them to make contact with each other as well as a forum to discuss issues that are of importance to them in their work. We hope that the launch of these initiatives will be of a great benefit to musicians who work in education”.

]]>http://www.completemusicupdate.com/article/mu-announces-teaching-partnerships/feed/0MU to debate Pay To Play at In The Cityhttp://www.completemusicupdate.com/article/mu-to-debate-pay-to-play-at-in-the-city/
http://www.completemusicupdate.com/article/mu-to-debate-pay-to-play-at-in-the-city/#commentsFri, 24 Sep 2010 11:01:00 +0000/post/MU-to-debate-Pay-To-Play-at-In-The-City.aspx

[Click for full details]]]>

The Musicians’ Union will lead a debate at next month’s In The City convention in Manchester on the concept of ‘pay to play’, the thing where grass-roots promoters insist on artists committing to a minimum income clause in their booking contract, meaning the band may have to cover any losses if not enough tickets are sold. It’s a system that basically shifts some or all of the risk from the traditional risk taker, the promoter, to the artist themselves. And it’s not something the MU has been especially happy with in the past.

Says MU Assistant General Secretary Horace Trubridge, who will chair the panel: “The Musicians Union supports musicians and likes to see them paid for their commercial efforts. We don’t like to see them having to pay to go about their work. Some musicians not only pay to attend and play their own gigs, but they pay more than the punters coming through the door, and that can’t be right. Some promoters don’t actually like promoting and pass that part of their job onto the musicians by enforcing minimum ticket sales. This is not promoting as we know it, this is pay-to-play”.

That said, Trubridge admits that, while the MU has, in the past, been against all forms of pay to play, following some research by their newly formed gigs section they are now willing to accept that some such deals might have their merits. He continues: “The MU recognises that it’s really tough out there. Unless you are an established artist, you’re going to need to do deals in order to get the gigs to build up your fan base and launch your career. The MU will still oppose deals which leave musicians out of pocket, but we are now advising members to have a look at what is being offered – some pay to play gigs result in the artist making a decent sum of money”.

Guardian blogger Helienne Lindvall, BBC Introducing’s Chris Long, Manchester promoter Jay Taylor and Elbow’s Guy Garvey will join Trubridge for the ITC debate on 13 Oct. More about all things In The City can be found at www.inthecity.co.uk.

With 6music saved, it’s easy to forget the axe is still well and truly hanging over that other niche audience BBC digital radio service The Asian Network. But the Musicians’ Union haven’t forgotten and they used this week’s Trades Union Congress conference in Manchester to say so.

They submitted a motion to the conference calling on the BBC to halt plans to shut down the station. They also filed a motion calling on the government to reconsider plans to force the Department Of Culture, Media & Sport to make budget cuts of 25%, arguing doing so will put jobs at risk in the UK creative sector. According to Music Week, MU General Secretary John Smith reported that both motions were well received by his comrades in other unions.

Elsewhere in MU news, members of the orchestra of the Scottish Opera have reluctantly voted to accept new contracts from the Glasgow-based company that will make more musicians part-time rather than full-time employees, working a 28-31 week year. The MU had been negotiating for its members in the orchestra who initially opposed the new contracts, arguing they would impinge the artistic quality of the opera group’s output and leave many members in a difficult position professionally and financially.

Although accepting the new contracts in principle, MU officials will continue to negotiate for the best possible terms, while the union’s Regional Organiser for Scotland told CMU: “We believe [Scottish Opera] needs to deliver more for the audiences and communities it serves. We urge the management to work together with its employees across the company to find different and innovative ways of increasing productivity and achieving financial stability, which won’t compromise the company artistically, and will ensure the long-term future of Scottish Opera”.

UK Music, The Association Of Independent Music, the BPI and the Musician’s Union have all sent last minute pleas to the BBC Trust, asking for BBC 6music to be saved.

In a statement introducing a lengthy submission from UK Music, which includes a case study of the support 6music has given Moshi Moshi Records, and contributions from PR firm Anorak London and indie label Full Time Hobby Records, the trade body’s head Feargal Sharkey says: “It is vital that as an industry our voice is heard clearly, prominently and with determination. If nothing else, the BBC needs to understand that its current proposals for 6 are misinformed, inappropriate and, as an industry, not an option we are prepared to explore”.

Also contributing, in her role as an artist who released her first single through the aforementioned Moshi Moshi and who only received radio play on 6music at the start of her career, Florence ‘And The Machine’ Welch said: “6music gave me so much support at the start, and throughout my career, and I think the BBC would be failing to support young and upcoming talent if they were to take it off the air; no other radio station is as committed to playing new and alternative music, it would be a huge loss to the airwaves”.

Echoing Florence’s words, AIM’s Alison Wenham said in her own organisation’s submission: “It is right that the Association Of Independent Music – whose member companies are the finders and incubators of almost all new British music creators, performers and entrepreneurs – should stress the importance of 6music to independent music. 6music is a radio station which has quickly established itself as pivotal in this process of talent development. Readily available data clearly shows mainstream BBC music networks’ content is dominated by the major multinational entertainment companies – which suits these networks’ daytime audiences and competes with commercial music radio. Without 6music independent new music has no national radio station”.

Communicating major as well as indie label support for 6, BPI boss man Geoff Taylor said: “6music is exactly the kind of programming the licence fee is there to support – distinctive, high quality broadcasting that the commercial market would not provide. This is a chance for the Trust to stand up for the rights of the listener, and save a national treasure. Signing its death warrant would not only let down music fans, it would fail generations of British artists who do not get played otherwise”.

The MU, meanwhile, broke its response down into twenty points of fairly balanced arguing, concluding: “[BBC management’s proposals] contains a lot that the MU can support in terms of an overall strategy and vision for the BBC, but we are concerned that some of the cuts and reductions in current services seem to be aimed at appeasing the commercial and political forces that want to see a smaller and weaker BBC that does not fulfil its high ambitions. We would urge the BBC not to fall into the trap of offering unnecessary sacrifices in order to satisfy those who will always criticise the BBC”.

The BBC Trust’s public consultation on the Corporation’s strategic review, which proposes the cutting of 6, that other incredibly important radio service the Asian Network, and a raft of other BBC services, closes today. You have until 5pm today to submit your views, which you can do here: